Tehsildar certificate of agricultural cannot be ignored over Google Earth images

In deciding the authenticity of agricultural income, certificate from the Tahsildar and expert report cannot be ignored in preference to unverified Google Earth Pro images – ITAT

In a recent judgment, ITAT Chennai has held that in deciding the agricultural income, the authenticated documents such as the certificate from the Tahsildar and the expert report cannot be ignored in preference to unverified Google Earth Pro images.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
4762 (2025) (09) abcaus.in ITAT

In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A), NFAC in confirming addition towards unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

The Assessing Officer (AO) had reopened the assessment for the reason that there was a huge cash deposits and time deposit but the assessee has not filed return of income.

The assessee did not file return of income even in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act.  Subsequently, a reply was filled in response to notice u/s 142(1) of the Act stating that assessee is seasonal agriculturist and she gets only agriculture income and therefore, has not filed return of income.   

The assessee also submitted that she realized substantial amount from agriculture activities (tree crop) and the cash deposit was out of agriculture receipts and time deposits were from withdrawal from the time deposits.

The AO made enquiry from Forestry Department who estimated the income from tree crop. The AO made further enquiry through Google Earth Pro and concluded that the assessee had not cultivated the tree crop as claimed. The AO therefore did not accept assessee’s explanation that cash deposit in the bank account was out of sale proceeds of tree crop.

The AO estimated agricultural income from normal crops like paddy, ground nut, tapioca, blackgram etc and held that out of a total deposit only around ten per cent was explained income and added the balance cash deposit as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act.

Before the Tribunal the assessee submitted that she had cultivated said tree crop over a period of four years in 31 acres of land owned by her deceased husband and the crop harvest which took place in the month of April of the previous year led to deposit of cash into the bank account well before the demonetization period.

It was further submitted that the assessee in support of her stand of earning agriculture income placed on record the certificate obtained from Tahsildar and further produced the revenue records for substantiating the availability of cash from agricultural activity.

It was further submitted that the AO had obtained report from Forestry Department who had certified that the assessee could have earned income nearly as claimed.  However, the A.O ignoring the report of the Forestry Department proceeded solely on the data from Google Earth Pro.

It was contended that the Google Earth Data is not authenticated in contradiction to the authenticated revenue record and the certificate issued by the competent authority i.e., Tahsildar. 

The assessee also relied on the order of ITAT, Mumbai in support of her contention. It was submitted that even if the report of Forestry Department and above information are taken consideration then the unexplained cash deposit would come to much lesser amount than addition made by AO.

The Tribunal opined that the authenticated documents such as the certificate from the Tahsildar and the expert report of the Dean of Forestry Department cannot be ignored in preference to unverified Google Earth Pro images.

Therefore the Tribunal set aside the order CIT(A) and AO and directed the AO to pass fresh assessment order on the basis of report of the Forestry Department after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• CA accused of forgery by advising investment in a firm gets bail by Allahabad High Court
• Software had nexus with generation of profits, purchaser can’t be said a consumer – SC
• Termination upheld of Postmaster who embezzled money by mere stamping passbooks
• Supreme Court stays DGGI order on the issue of two parallel GST proceedings
• Assessee can’t be said to indulged in penny stock sale without showing his involvement